Trump, Donald J

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      In Michigan, Biden and Trump Offer a Preview of 2024

      by

      The candidates’ dueling styles were on clear display as the two men tried to woo voters affected by the United Automobile Workers strike.It’s going to be a long road to next November. And the first steps started this week.President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump traveled to Michigan, one day after the other, to speak directly to working-class voters in what amounted to a preview of a likely 2024 campaign.Their dueling styles were on clear display as the two men tried to woo voters affected by the United Automobile Workers strike. Mr. Biden has campaigned on a message of bolstering the middle class, protecting democratic norms and countering China. Mr. Trump, a criminal defendant several times over, has focused on vindicating himself, channeling conservative grievances and promoting America-first policies.Their differences are not just ideological and tactical but stylistic. Mr. Trump prefers a boisterous event that lets him take center stage, and Mr. Biden, so far, has opted for small fund-raisers where he can burnish his Scranton Joe persona.Voters have signaled that they would prefer a different set of options in 2024, but for now, the most likely choice is between the current and former president, who have sharply diverging visions for the future of the United States.In a speech on Wednesday, former President Donald J. Trump criticized the Biden administration’s clean-energy agenda.Doug Mills/The New York TimesRaucous rallies, like the one he held on Wednesday, allow Mr. Trump to test his messaging and give him political oxygen to power through the next news cycle. On Wednesday, as seven other Republican presidential candidates gathered in California for a primary debate, Mr. Trump bragged about being ahead of the field — at one point calling his rivals “job candidates” for a second Trump administration — and brought his usual bluster to a crowd of several hundred at a nonunion manufacturing facility.Guests circulated inside the facility, called Drake Enterprises, some wearing T-shirts emblazoned with Mr. Trump’s mug shot and a telling caption: “NEVER SURRENDER.”In an hourlong speech, Mr. Trump castigated the Biden administration’s clean-energy agenda, which includes a push for a transition to electric vehicles that has aggravated union workers who share his populist views on the economy.“A vote for Crooked Joe means the future of the auto industry will be based in China,” Mr. Trump told the crowd, warning that a transition to electric vehicles amounted to a “transition to hell.” He offered tepid support for the striking autoworkers, telling them that electric vehicles would undermine any success with a new contract: “It doesn’t make a damn bit of difference what you get because in two years you’re all going to be out of business.”Mr. Trump repeatedly overinflated the evening’s crowd size, at one point falsely claiming that there were 9,000 people waiting outside the venue. But in Michigan, he did what Mr. Biden has not done yet: He pleaded for endorsements and votes.“Your leadership should endorse me,” Mr. Trump said, “and I will not say a bad thing about them again and they will have done their job.”Mr. Trump spoke to a crowd of several hundred on Wednesday.Doug Mills/The New York TimesNever a big fan of a rally, Mr. Biden, who has for decades presented himself as a champion of the middle class, has so far limited most of his campaign appearances to fund-raisers or receptions with supporters. At those events, he opts to shake hands in rope lines and share stories of his decades in politics. He also warns his supporters of the grave risk he feels Mr. Trump continues to pose to the country.On Tuesday, before traveling to California for campaign events and a meeting with technology advisers, Mr. Biden became the first sitting president to join a picket line, visiting workers outside a General Motors facility in Belleville, Mich. — a sign of how important it was for him to court a powerful political bloc whose ranks are no longer full of reliably Democratic voters.“The middle class built this country,” Mr. Biden told striking workers on Tuesday. “And unions built the middle class. That’s a fact.”President Biden showed support for striking autoworkers by joining their picket line outside a General Motors facility west of Detroit.Pete Marovich for The New York TimesIn his short appearance with workers — Mr. Trump and several of supporters pointed out that the visit was only about 12 minutes — Mr. Biden spoke briefly and turned a bullhorn over to Shawn Fain, the U.A.W. president.Unlike Mr. Trump, the president did not take the chance to link his visit to Michigan to securing union backing. When asked if he hoped to receive the support of the U.A.W., which endorsed him in 2020 but has refrained so far out of complaints about his clean-energy agenda, Mr. Biden would only say, “I’m not worried about that.”Before Mr. Trump’s visit on Wednesday, the Biden campaign released an ad targeting the former president’s economic track record, accusing Mr. Trump of passing “tax breaks for his rich friends while automakers shuttered their plants and Michigan lost manufacturing jobs.”Age and energy have become prevailing concerns among voters about Mr. Biden, who spent this week crisscrossing the country. On Thursday, Mr. Biden, who is 80, is scheduled to deliver what is widely seen as a rebuttal to Mr. Trump’s appearance and the Republican primary debate.Mr. Trump, who is 77, relied on a teleprompter on Wednesday evening — as does Mr. Biden when he delivers prepared remarks. He could not resist the occasional aside, including an extended complaint about the paint job on Air Force One — “so inelegant,” said Mr. Trump, who tried to change the exterior of the plane when he was president. When he departed, he took his time navigating a set of stairs that led to the stage.President Biden became the first sitting president to join a picket line on Tuesday.Pete Marovich for The New York TimesIn recent appearances, Mr. Biden has spoken comparatively softly, and has tried to make light of concerns about his age. “I’ve never been more optimistic about our country’s future in the 800 years I’ve served,” he said at a campaign event this month.But at a reception in California on Wednesday, Mr. Biden had sharp words for his predecessor.“We’re running because our most important freedoms — the right to choose, the right to vote, the right to be who you are, to love who you love — has been attacked and shredded,” the president told supporters. “Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans are determined to destroy American democracy because they want to break down institutional structures.” More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Christie and DeSantis Promptly Attack Trump at Debate: ‘Donald Duck’

      by

      Former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey used his first answer of the debate to attack the absent former President Donald J. Trump.Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida soon followed.The two candidates went right at Mr. Trump for skipping a second debate in a row, painting him as cowardly and as skirting the democratic process.But Mr. Christie was equipped with more than one canned attack. After the first commercial break, he turned directly to the camera in the middle of an answer to address the former president.“Donald, I know you’re watching, you can’t help yourself,” Mr. Christie said. “You’re not here tonight, not because of polls, and not because of your indictments. You’re not here tonight because you’re afraid of being on the stage and defending your record. You’re ducking these things, and let me tell you what’s going to happen. You keep doing that, and no one up here is going to call you Donald Trump anymore. We’re going to call you Donald Duck.”Mr. Christie had issued a similar taunt early in the debate, saying that Mr. Trump “hides behind the walls of his golf clubs.” His quip was quickly echoed by Mr. DeSantis.“Where’s Joe Biden?” Mr. DeSantis said. “He’s completely missing in action from leadership. And you know who else is missing in action? Donald Trump is missing in action. He should be on this stage tonight. He owes it to you to defend his record, where they added $7.8 trillion to the debt, that set the stage for the inflation that we have.”That Mr. Christie would immediately criticize Mr. Trump is no surprise, as he has made attacking the former president central to his campaign. He did so again minutes later, saying Mr. Trump had built only 52 miles of a wall along the southern border.But Mr. DeSantis’s attack was a marked change from his posture in the first debate, reflecting an effort to draw more stark contrasts with Mr. Trump. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump to Speak at Nonunion Factory Amid UAW Strike, Skipping the Debate

      by

      A day after President Biden appeared on a union picket line, the former president spoke at an auto parts factory in Michigan.Seeking more of the voters who first paved his way to the White House in 2016, former President Donald J. Trump rallied at a Michigan auto parts factory on Wednesday night, setting up a clash of messages aimed at blue-collar workers one day after President Biden appeared on a strike line with United Automobile Workers.Mr. Biden affirmed Tuesday his support for U.A.W. strikers’ demands for a 40 percent pay raise, while Mr. Trump has given no indication that he backs the union’s position. In his appearance at a nonunion factory on Wednesday, Mr. Trump was seeking to drive a wedge between rank-and-file workers and their leaders and to attack Mr. Biden by suggesting that his support for electric vehicles would cost American autoworkers their jobs.“I will not allow, under any circumstances, the American auto industry to die,” Mr. Trump said. “I want it to thrive.”“Get your union leaders to endorse me, and I’ll take care of the rest,” Mr. Trump said.Coming at the same time that other Republican primary candidates were debating on national television in California, Mr. Trump’s appearance outside Detroit sent the message that he had all but moved on from his lower-polling rivals and was focused on the potential for a rematch with Mr. Biden in 2024.Mr. Trump spoke at Drake Enterprises in Clinton Township, north of Detroit. The company’s 150 employees make gearshift levers for heavy-duty trucks, as well as components that go into cars made by General Motors and Ford. Its president, Nathan Stemple, said it was a nonunion shop.Before the former president took the stage, a few hundred people were seated on the floor of the factory, and at least one man in a red U.A.W. T-shirt said he was a union member and voiced support for the strike. The Trump campaign made no effort to recruit attendees through U.A.W. locals, according to the union.Hours after appearing with Mr. Biden on a picket line on Tuesday outside a G.M. facility in Belleville, Mich., Shawn Fain, the president of the U.A.W., told CNN: “I find a pathetic irony that the former president is going to hold a rally for union members at a nonunion business.”Mr. Fain denounced Mr. Trump’s lack of support during a strike against G.M. in 2019 when he was in office and said he had no plans to meet with the former president during his visit.Mr. Trump has long sought to separate rank-and-file union members from union leaders, who largely endorse Democrats. He has had notable success: He won about four in 10 votes from union households in 2020, according to exit polls.Mr. Trump repeated his recent attacks on the Biden administration’s push for electric vehicles and repeated a claim he made that autoworkers were being sold out by their leadership.The U.A.W., which argues that the transition to electric vehicles is inevitable and that it is driven by consumer demand, seeks to ensure that zero-emission vehicles are made by workers earning union wages.On Tuesday, as Mr. Biden became the first president of modern times to join a picket line, Mr. Trump issued a statement predicting that “in three years there will be no autoworker jobs” if Mr. Biden’s policies prevail, but that “with me, there will be jobs and wages like you’ve never seen before.” He delivered that message again in his address on Wednesday.Marick Masters, a professor of business with a focus on labor issues at Wayne State University in Detroit, said the economic uncertainty around the transition to electric vehicles worried many autoworkers, providing Mr. Trump with a political opening.“There’s a big question about how successful these companies are going to be in the transition to electric vehicles,” he said. “Trump’s message resonates, and it cuts across a broad swath of workers.”Mr. Stemple, Drake’s president, said a too-rapid switch to electric vehicles would decimate his family company. He noted that electric vehicles did not require gearshift levers, one of his main products. “A lot of shops like us wouldn’t survive that transition if it happened rapidly,” he said.Jason Walsh, executive director of the BlueGreen Alliance, a group that seeks common ground between unions and environmentalists, said Mr. Trump’s claim that the E.V. transition would drive American jobs to China “is almost exactly backwards.”“What the Biden administration is trying to do is actually bring jobs back from China by investing in revitalizing American auto manufacturing,” he said.Mr. Trump’s record with autoworkers is decidedly mixed. During his term, he pressured automakers to keep their factories in the United States rather than Mexico. Auto manufacturing jobs climbed in his first year in office, before flattening and dipping — and then the pandemic sent them plunging. Under Mr. Biden, auto jobs have exceeded their highest level under Mr. Trump.The location of Mr. Trump’s speech carried political symbolism: Macomb County, north of Detroit, was home to the original “Reagan Democrats,” the blue-collar voters who in the 1980s deserted the party that had traditionally advanced their standard of living, in favor of Republican messaging coded in racial division. More

    • 100 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      When Trump Says ‘People,’ He Means ‘His People’

      by

      Fifty years ago, reviewing Toni Morrison’s novel “Sula” in this newspaper, a critic wrote that Morrison was “far too talented to remain only a marvelous recorder of the Black side of provincial American life”; that to “maintain the large and serious audience she deserves” and transcend the “limiting classification ‘Black woman writer’” she had to “address a riskier contemporary reality.”Morrison, who would go on to win Pulitzer and Nobel Prizes, bristled at reviews like that, which seemed to suggest that she needed to write about white people. She chafed at the notion that writing primarily about Black people was a limitation rather than a liberation. In a 1981 New Republic interview, Morrison put a point on it: “From my perspective, there are only Black people. When I say ‘people,’ that’s what I mean.”This idea, that the parameters of the word “people” can be defined by a speaker or writer, came rushing back to me recently as I was reviewing the increasingly erratic posts and comments of Donald Trump.Intellectually and creatively, Trump is the antithesis of Morrison, but if I come to understand that when Trump says “people,” it is confined to his people, then his inane utterances make more sense to me. In fact, the whole of the MAGA universe begins to make more sense to me.On Sunday, Trump posted on Truth Social, claiming Comcast, MSNBC’s owner, and “others of the LameStream Media” will be “thoroughly scrutinized” because they are “THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE” who should pay “for what they have done to our once great Country.”“The people” here means his people, the only worthy and legitimate people, the only ones worth defending because they are the only ones defending him. When he says “our once great country,” he means the country when it most benefited those most devoted to him, at a time when the racial hierarchy was more fixed, the patriarchy was more entrenched, immigrant communities were often whiter and gender identities were more rigid.There’s a reason Trump never attempted to govern as a unifier and isn’t running for re-election as one. Instead, he’s deepening his attachment with loyalists. He wants to reshape America into a nation where his will rules, the law is his tool to punish others and he is exempt from punishment — where his throngs are rewarded for their adoration.It isn’t as simple as saying that Trump wants to drag the country backward. He wants to do something far more destructive: He wants to marry the country’s more intolerant past to a more autocratic future. He wants to bend his brand of straight white male nationalism into a kind of totalitarianism. That his definition of “the people” is implicit, not overt, only helps him. The fact that there are women, people of color and L.G.B.T.Q. Americans who support him doesn’t alter the fundamental nature of his appeal.And I believe that many of his most ardent followers understand this intuitively. They idolize Trump because his craven desire for power, and the protection from prosecution that he believes it will provide, would also offer them a ride on his coattails.A Trump autocracy would redound to their credit and they would be rewarded for it.So they overlook Trump’s manifold legal jeopardies, such as the ruling on Tuesday by a New York judge that Trump committed fraud for years by intentionally misvaluing his properties for personal financial benefit.Trump lashed out at the ruling in a statement posted on Truth Social regurgitating many of his familiar attack lines: calling the judge “DERANGED,” undermining the credibility of the prosecutor and claiming that attempts to hold him accountable are all part of an election interference scheme to prevent him from retaking the presidency.But part of his complaint, which has become a cliché at this point, was that his civil rights are being violated and “If they can do this to me, they can do this to YOU!”He and his people, the true people, are the new civil rights victims, in need of a defensive mobilization to prevent continued injury. Trump defense becomes self-defense.And this works. Trump enjoys a commanding lead among Republicans competing for their party’s presidential nomination. In part that’s because he has the advantage of having already held the presidency, creating an aura of incumbency around him, lifting him and legitimizing him.But his Republican primary standing is also because he is making a political militia of the Republican Party itself, with its core voters activated to defend him no matter what. The person who gave voice to the party’s most base instincts is the hero of the Republican base. He didn’t try to restrict them; he unleashed them.He spoke to and for “the people.” He tailored a particular form of populism, one aimed at xenophobes and subversives.This is, I believe, why Trump maintains strong support even as his legal troubles grow: He has been unflinchingly loyal to one portion of the body politic, and his followers are simply reciprocating.They don’t worry about Trump torching the country if he’s re-elected, because they believe that they will frolic in the ashes. They believe that whatever benefits Trump will eventually benefit them. Trump has deceived his people into believing in trickle-down tyranny.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and Instagram. More

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The Fraud Ruling Against Trump

      by

      More from our inbox:Reducing Gun ViolenceThe Embattled SpeakerInvesting in Artistic Creators, Not BuildingsBar Russian PerformersChinese Truth Tellers Doug Mills/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Fraud by Trump Found as Judge Issues Penalties” (front page, Sept. 27):Justice Arthur F. Engoron’s ruling that Donald Trump engaged in a pattern of widespread fraud, whereby he embellished the size and scope of his various business entities for accounting advantages, is very much in keeping with his propensity for engaging in similar grandiose fabrication as president.In fact, literally on the very first day of his presidency, Mr. Trump found it necessary to overstate the size of the inaugural crowd to a demonstrably laughable degree. Such reflexive and self-serving exaggeration, regarding matters large and small, by Mr. Trump persisted to the end of his term, culminating in his wildly fantastical claims of election fraud.Mr. Trump’s fraudulent business practices over a period of several years were a glaring road map, for anyone bothering to look, as to how he would conduct himself as commander in chief. His fate now rests in the combined hands of the judicial system and the electorate.Mark GodesChelsea, Mass.To the Editor:In an extraordinary ruling, Justice Arthur F. Engoron held that Donald Trump, by illegally inflating the value of his properties, committed fraud by as much as $2.2 billion. A trial in this case, brought by New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, is scheduled for Monday morning, but this ruling is a huge blow to Mr. Trump and his entire family.The ruling called for the cancellation of some of Mr. Trump’s business certificates in New York, which could spell the end of the Trump real estate dynasty, or what’s left of it. The possible financial cost for Mr. Trump could be enormous, as Ms. James is seeking fines up to $250 million.It seems “Teflon Don” will not slip away from the damning case against him here in New York.Henry A. LowensteinNew YorkTo the Editor:Somewhere the late Wayne Barrett is smiling. He mapped out Donald Trump’s crooked business deals years ago. The bookkeeping and tax-evading maneuvers were all laid out in his 1992 investigative biography, “Trump: The Deals and the Downfall.” Tuesday’s court ruling was long overdue.That it took so long for someone to bring the hammer down on Mr. Trump is an indictment of a legal system that has too many escape hatches. Delay, appeal after appeal, loophole-seeking lawyers, statutes of limitations, dismissals on technical grounds — all strands woven into Mr. Trump’s web of corruption.Fred SmithBronxReducing Gun ViolenceSurvivors of school shootings and those who had lost loved ones to gun violence were among the hundreds of attendees at the Rose Garden event.Kent Nishimura for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Biden Forms a New Office to Address Gun Violence” (news article, Sept. 23):In his effort to combat gun violence, President Biden should consider issuing an executive order stating that gun manufacturers who currently market to the U.S. military must agree to sell only to our armed forces, to foreign militaries approved of by the U.S., and to American citizens who have undergone extensive background checks and are on a federal registry list.If these manufacturers wish to continue to sell assault weapons to the public at large, then they will lose the U.S. military as a major client.This order would be issued under the president’s authority as commander in chief and would not require congressional approval.Susan AltmanWashingtonThe Embattled Speaker Kenny Holston/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Maybe Matt Gaetz Is Right,” by Michelle Cottle (Opinion, Sept. 21):With the continuing threat of the Freedom Caucus to file motions to “vacate the chair” (depose the speaker), Hakeem Jeffries, the minority leader, has a golden opportunity: Form a group of 25 to 30 Democrats to either support Kevin McCarthy or find a centrist Republican member who can be elected speaker with their aid.Then, by abolishing the rule permitting any one member from calling a vote to vacate the chair, the House could function without threats of blackmail and do the people’s business. Mr. Jeffries, go for it.Doug McConeWayne, Pa.Investing in Artistic Creators, Not BuildingsA view of the new Perelman Performing Arts Center at night, when the white marble building turns amber and becomes a beacon in Lower Manhattan.George Etheredge for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “A Dazzling Arts Haven Blossoms at Ground Zero,” by Michael Kimmelman (Critic’s Notebook, front page, Sept. 14):As dazzling as the Perelman Performing Arts Center is — and it is truly dazzling — Mr. Kimmelman’s comment that the building itself cost “enough to support who knows how many existing community organizations around the city for who knows how many years” struck me as the story of America’s perpetual disregard of the arts.The building always comes first, followed by whatever potpourri of productions the owners can scrabble together to put inside it. Can we never begin the investment with the people, the artistic creators themselves? Is it always because the donors need an edifice on which to implant his or her name?America doesn’t believe in financing the arts; America believes the arts are a business and should finance itself.The Times recently ran an article saying that our theaters are in crisis, as is our creative community in general. When are we going to finance the creators instead of the buildings?Jennifer WarrenLos AngelesThe writer is a professor of directing at the U.S.C. School of Cinematic Arts and chair of the Alliance of Women Directors.Bar Russian PerformersNetrebko bowing on the stage of the State Opera after performing in Verdi’s “Macbeth.”Annette Riedl/DPA, via Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “Receiving Boos, and an Ovation” (Arts, Sept. 18), about the Russian soprano Anna Netrebko, who has supported Vladimir Putin:Your article raises the issue of whether citizens of countries with criminal regimes should be allowed to participate or perform in international events and forums. While punishing individual artists, performers and athletes for their country’s bad acts seems to be unfair, the fact is that their participation promotes their nation’s prestige and interests, even if indirectly.In addition, changes in Russia’s behavior will occur only if the populace forces those in power to change course. The international community should not endorse Russian talent by allowing those individuals to participate in international events or competitions.The message of the international community to the most talented Russians should be that they need to change their country. And while those individuals may be unhappy, that’s exactly the point; history shows that changes in authoritarian governments occur when the population is unhappy and demands change.Russians should be barred from participation in all international events until Russia ends the war in Ukraine and removes its troops from all of Ukraine.Daniel ShapiroSuffern, N.Y.Chinese Truth Tellers Illustration by Linda Huang; source photograph by Tsering DorjeTo the Editor:I write to commend you for “China’s Underground Historians,” by Ian Johnson (Opinion, Sept. 24). These are brave individuals dedicated to ensuring that their country’s past is documented as accurately as possible.As a historian myself, I am increasingly aware of how authoritarian leaders want to cover up their country’s misdeeds, whether in the U.S. or abroad.I stand in awe of the courage of these Chinese truth tellers.Glenna MatthewsSunnyvale, Calif. More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Shawn Fain, U.A.W. Leader, Says He Won’t Meet Trump in Michigan

      by

      Shawn Fain, the president of the United Automobile Workers union, said he was opposed to meeting the former president during his visit to Michigan on Wednesday.The leader of the United Automobile Workers union ruled out meeting former President Donald J. Trump, the 2024 Republican front-runner, when he visits Michigan on Wednesday, casting him as an out-of-touch billionaire who has been hostile toward the industry’s workers, who are currently on strike.When Shawn Fain, the U.A.W. president, was asked by CNN in an interview on Tuesday whether he would be open to such an audience with Mr. Trump, he said that there was no upside.“I see no point in meeting with him because I don’t think the man has any bit of care about what our workers stand for, what the working class stands for,” Mr. Fain said. “He serves a billionaire class, and that’s what’s wrong with this country.”His remarks came just hours after President Biden, at the invitation of Mr. Fain, joined a picket line outside a General Motors facility in Belleville, Mich., near Detroit.Mr. Trump’s campaign did not address Mr. Fain’s specific criticism on Wednesday, but contended that rank-and-file unions members did not uniformly share his views.“The reality is that there’s a disconnect between the political leadership of some of the labor unions and the working middle-class employees that they purport to represent,” said Steven Cheung, a spokesman for the Trump campaign. “President Trump will be in Michigan talking with union workers and ensuring American jobs are protected.”Mr. Fain stopped short of endorsing Mr. Biden’s re-election, but he had harsh words for Mr. Trump and his planned speech at a nonunion plant in Macomb County, Mich.“I find a pathetic irony that the former president is going to hold a rally for union members at a nonunion business,” Mr. Fain said.Mr. Fain said that Mr. Trump had blamed U.A.W. members and their contracts for the troubles of automakers during the 2008 recession. As a presidential candidate in 2015, he added, Mr. Trump supported moving jobs in the industry out of the Midwest, with fewer protections for union workers. Mr. Fain also asked why the former president did not show solidarity with General Motors workers in 2019, while Mr. Trump was in office, when they were on strike for 60 days.“I didn’t see him hold a rally,” Mr. Fain said. “I didn’t see him stand up at the picket line, and I sure as hell didn’t hear him comment about it. He was missing in action.” More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      2nd Republican Debate: What to Watch for Tonight

      by

      The first matchup last month fueled momentum for Nikki Haley and a slide in standing for Ron DeSantis. What it didn’t do is diminish Donald Trump’s lead.Seven Republican presidential hopefuls not named Donald J. Trump will gather on Wednesday at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., with the pressing task of securing second place in the Republican Party’s nominating race — and the ultimate mission of actually challenging the front-runner, Mr. Trump.The first debate last month in Milwaukee was a breakout moment for Vivek Ramaswamy, a wealthy entrepreneur and political newcomer, but it also elevated Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and ambassador to the United Nations. What it didn’t do is diminish Mr. Trump’s lead.Here’s what to watch for in the second debate.Can DeSantis reset (again)?For months, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida was widely seen as the strongest challenger to Mr. Trump. But after a first debate where Mr. DeSantis was largely relegated to the sidelines, his standing in the race has sunk. Recent surveys of Iowa and New Hampshire show that Mr. DeSantis has lost as much as half of his support, falling to third place — or lower. Some of his biggest longtime donors have of late grown reluctant to put more money into a campaign that seems to be headed in the wrong direction.To rebuild his momentum, Mr. DeSantis will need to do more on the debate stage than simply avoid a major misstep. Some strong exchanges, particularly with Mr. Ramaswamy, who is competing for some of the same hard-right voters, could help Mr. DeSantis stem his losses.Nate Cohn, The Times’s chief political analyst, looks at why former President Donald J. Trump’s lead in the Republican primary has grown despite skipping the first debate and on what Republican donors will look for in the second debate.Doug Mills/The New York TimesThe Trump factorMr. Trump, who is under four criminal indictments, skipped the first debate and emerged much as he entered: the overwhelmingly dominant figure in the primary race. His opponents mostly jostled for position among themselves, declining to take significant swings at the front-runner in absentia. In the post-debate polling, Mr. Trump gained more support than any of the candidates who did appear on the stage.Since then, as his legal cases play out in the courts, Mr. Trump has grown more extreme, and violent, in his rhetoric. He has suggested Gen. Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should be executed for treason, accused “liberal Jews” of voting to “destroy” America and Israel, and seemed to threaten the judges and prosecutors in the felony cases against him.So far, his rivals have not used those attacks to go after the front-runner as extreme, but with the first ballots to be cast in Iowa in January, time is running out. The Wednesday debate could be among the lower-polling candidates’ last chances to take aim before a large audience, as the Republican National Committee’s criteria to make the next debate stage is expected to become even more strict. It remains to be seen whether the second debate will persuade top donors still on the sidelines to consolidate behind an alternative to Mr. Trump.Rather than attending the debate, Mr. Trump will appear with union workers in Detroit.How Scott and Haley performMr. Ramaswamy might have grabbed headlines with a pugnacious performance last go-round, but Ms. Haley had arguably the best night. She distinguished herself with her answers on abortion and foreign policy while seizing the opportunity to position herself as the “adult in the room” as her male rivals bickered. She raised more than $1 million over the 72 hours that followed the event, winning over Republican donors who have been looking for a plausible alternative to Mr. Trump. And she elevated herself over Senator Tim Scott, a fellow South Carolinian, as the next-generation conservative who could potentially appeal to independents and some disaffected Democrats.Mr. Scott faded on the stage in Milwaukee. But while it’s critical for him to make a splash at the Reagan Library in order to eat into Ms. Haley’s gains, any spotlight-grabbing moments cannot tarnish his persona as the “happy warrior” with the winning smile and the hopeful message. A bad night, or just an invisible night, for Mr. Scott would dim hopes of a resurgence.Can the more vocal Trump critics make a case?Former Vice President Mike Pence and Chris Christie, the former governor of New Jersey, have tried to position themselves as the “anti-Trumps.” Mr. Christie is the loudest castigator of the former president as a threat to the nation, while Mr. Pence has denounced his former running mate as a false conservative, soft on abortion and too populist on trade and foreign policy. Neither argument has gained traction with voters so far.For both men, the debate will be a chance to find an anti-Trump message that actually appeals to Republican voters. Mr. Christie tried to use his trademark slashing style in Milwaukee, only to be booed down by an audience that registered its loyalty to Mr. Trump. The audience Wednesday night could prove to me be more sympathetic, or at least more polite, allowing more of the former governor’s blows to land.Shutdown politicsThe federal government appears to be barreling toward a shutdown this Sunday, with Congress paralyzed into inaction by a fractured Republican majority in the House that is unable to pass the spending bills needed to keep federal agencies operating past Sept. 30. Complicating House Republican calculations is Mr. Trump, who has demanded that his followers vote against any spending measure that keeps funding the Justice Department’s prosecution of him over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and hide highly classified documents that he took from the White House. It is an impossible request.The seven candidates on the stage will almost certainly be asked their views. Their answers could prove to be a useful counterweight to Mr. Trump’s “SHUT IT DOWN!” instruction — or more fuel to drive Republicans toward an economically damaging and politically risky crisis that would dominate headlines for weeks.What the candidates say about UkraineAt the heart of the looming shutdown is a key foreign policy question: Should the United States continue its military aid to Ukrainian forces battling Russia’s invading army? The issue has divided Republicans in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail, elevating candidates like Mr. Ramaswamy and, to some extent, Mr. DeSantis, whose tepid support at best for more aid may appeal to isolationist voters who embrace Mr. Trump’s America First mantra.Support for Ukraine has become a mark of traditional foreign policy conservatism, embraced most strongly by Mr. Pence and Ms. Haley. Will they stand by their pro-Ukraine positions or bend in the face of Republicans ready to shut down the government to stop any more taxpayer dollars from flowing to Kyiv? More

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      ‘Trump Is Scaring the Hell Out of Me’: Three Writers Preview the Second G.O.P. Debate

      by

      Frank Bruni, a contributing Opinion writer, hosted a written online conversation with Josh Barro, who writes the newsletter Very Serious, and Sarah Isgur, a senior editor at The Dispatch, to discuss their expectations for the second Republican debate on Wednesday night. They also dig into and try to sort out a barrage of politics around President Biden’s sagging approval numbers, an impeachment inquiry, a potential government shutdown and shocking political rhetoric from former President Trump.Frank Bruni: For starters, Josh and Sarah, Donald Trump is scaring the hell out of me. It’s not just his mooning over a Glock. It’s his musing that in what he clearly sees as better days, Gen. Mark Milley could have been executed for treason. Is this a whole new altitude of unhinged — and a louder, shriller warning of what a second term of Trump would be like (including the suspension of the Constitution)?Josh Barro: I don’t think people find Trump’s provocations very interesting these days. I personally struggle to find them interesting, even though they are important. I’m not sure this constitutes an escalation relative to the end of Trump’s service — the last thing he did as president was try to steal the election. So I’m not sure this reads as new — Trump is and has been unhinged, and that’s priced in.Bruni: Sarah, what do you make of how little has been made of it? Is Trump indemnified against his own indecency, or can we dream that he may finally estrange a consequential percentage of voters?Sarah Isgur: Here’s what’s wild. In one poll, the G.O.P. is now more or less tied with Democrats for “which party cares about people like me,” closing in on Democrats’ 13-point advantage in 2016 … and in another poll, the G.O.P. is leading Democrats by over 20 points on “dealing with the economy.” So how is Joe Biden even still in this race? And the answer, as you allude to, is Trump.Barro: Trump’s behavior has already estranged a consequential percentage of voters. If Republicans found a candidate who was both normal and law-abiding and a popularist, they’d win big, instead of trying to patch together a narrow Electoral College victory, like Trump managed in 2016 and nearly did again in 2020.Bruni: Sarah, you’re suggesting that Trump is a huge general election gift to Biden. To pivot to tonight’s debate, is there any chance Biden doesn’t get that gift — that he winds up facing Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis or someone else?Isgur: Possible? Sure. Every year for Christmas, I thought it was possible there was a puppy in one of the boxes under the tree. There never was. I still think Ron DeSantis is probably the only viable alternative to Trump. But he’s looking far less viable than he was in June. And the more voters and donors flirt with Tim Scott or Nikki Haley, it becomes a race for No. 2 (see this debate) — and the better it is for Trump. That helps Trump in two ways: First, it burns time on the clock and he’s the front-runner. Second, the strongest argument for these other candidates was that Trump couldn’t beat Biden. But that’s becoming a harder and harder case to make — more because of Biden than Trump. And as that slides off the table, Republican primary voters don’t see much need to shop for an alternative.Barro: These other G.O.P. candidates wouldn’t have Trump’s legal baggage and off-putting lawlessness, but most of them have been running to Trump’s right on abortion and entitlements. And if Trump isn’t the nominee, he’ll quite possibly be acting to undermine whoever is the G.O.P. nominee. So it’s possible that Republicans are actually more likely to win the election if they nominate him than if they don’t.Isgur: You talk to these campaigns, and they will readily admit that if Trump wins Iowa, this thing is over. And right now he’s consistently up more than 30 points in Iowa. Most of the movement in the polls is between the other candidates. That ain’t gonna work.Barro: I agree with Sarah that the primary is approaching being over. DeSantis has sunk in the polls and he’s not making a clear argument about why Trump shouldn’t be nominated.Bruni: Do any of tonight’s debaters increase their criticism of him? Sharpen their attacks? Go beyond Haley’s “Gee, you spent a lot of money” and Mike Pence’s “You were not nice to me on Jan. 6”? And if you could script those attacks, what would they be? Give the candidates a push and some advice.Barro: DeSantis has been making some comments lately about how Trump kept getting beat in negotiations by Democrats when he was in office. He’s also been criticizing Trump for throwing pro-lifers under the bus. The unsaid thing here that could tie together these issues and Trump’s legal issues is that he is selfish — that this project is about benefiting him, not about benefiting Republican voters. It’s about doing what’s good for him.That said, this is a very tough pitch for a party full of people who love Trump and who think he constantly faces unfair attacks. But it’s true, and you can say it without ever actually attacking Trump from the left.Isgur: Here’s the problem for most of them: It’s not their last rodeo. Sure, they’d like to win this time around. And for some there’s a thought of the vice presidency or a cabinet pick. But more than that, they want to be viable in 2028 or beyond. Trump has already been an electoral loser for the G.O.P. in 2018, 2020 and 2022, and it hasn’t mattered. They aren’t going to bet their futures on Trump’s power over G.O.P. primary voters diminishing if he loses in 2024, and if he wins, he’ll be limited to one term, so all the more reason to tread lightly with Trump’s core voters. Chris Christie is a great example of the alternative strategy because it is probably his last race — and so he’s going straight at Trump. But it hasn’t fundamentally altered the dynamics of the race.Barro: I think DeSantis’s star certainly looks dimmer than it did when he got into the race.Isgur: DeSantis is worse off. But this was always going to happen. Better to happen in 2024 than 2028. But Josh is right. Political operatives will often pitch their candidate on there being “no real downside” to running because you grow your national donor lists and expand your name recognition with voters outside your state. But a lot of these guys are learning what Scott Walker, Jeb Bush and Tim Pawlenty have learned: There is a downside to running when expectations are high — you don’t meet them.Bruni: Give me a rough estimate — how much time have Haley and her advisers spent forging and honing put-downs of Vivek Ramaswamy? And would you like to suggest any for their arsenal? Josh, I’m betting you do, as you have written acidly about your college days with Ramaswamy.Barro: So I said in a column (“Section Guy Runs for President”) that I didn’t know Ramaswamy in college, but I have subsequently learned that, when I was a senior, I participated in a debate about Social Security privatization that he moderated. That I was able to forget him, I think, is a reflection of how common the overbearing type was at Harvard.Bruni: Ramaswamy as a carbon copy of countless others? Now you’ve really put me off my avocado toast, Josh. Is he in this race deep into the primaries, or is he the Herman Cain of this cycle (he asked wishfully)?Barro: I think the Ramaswamy bubble has already popped.Bruni: Popped? You make him sound like a pimple.Isgur: Your words, Frank.Barro: He makes himself sound like a pimple. He’s down to 5.1 percent in the RealClearPolitics polling average, below where he was just before the August debate. One poll showed his unfavorables going up more than his favorables after the debate — he is very annoying, and that was obvious to a lot of people, whether or not they share my politics.Isgur: Agree. He’s not Trump. Trump can weather the “take me seriously, not literally” nonsense. Ramaswamy doesn’t have it.Bruni: Let’s talk about some broader dynamics. We’re on the precipice of a federal shutdown. If it comes, will that hurt Republicans and boost Biden, or will it seem to voters like so much usual insider garbage that it’s essentially white noise, to mix my metaphors wildly?Barro: I’m not convinced that government shutdowns have durable political effects.Isgur: It seems to keep happening every couple years, and the sky doesn’t fall. It is important, though, when it comes to what the G.O.P. is and what it will be moving forward. Kevin McCarthy battling for his job may not be anything new. But Chip Roy is the fiscal heart and soul of this wing of the party, and even he is saying they are going to pay a political penalty.Barro: I find it interesting that Kevin McCarthy seems extremely motivated to avoid one, or at least contain its duration. He thinks the politics are important.Isgur: I’d argue the reason it’s important is because it shows you what happens when voters elect people based on small donor popularity and social media memes. Nobody is rewarded for accomplishments, which require compromise — legislative or otherwise. These guys do better politically when they are in the minority. They actually win by losing — at least when their colleagues lose, that is. That’s not a sustainable model for a political party: Elect us and we’ll complain about the other guys the best!Bruni: What about the impeachment inquiry? The first hearing is on Thursday. Is it and should it be an enormous concern for Biden?Isgur: I’m confused why everyone else is shrugging this thing off. I keep hearing that this doesn’t give the G.O.P. any additional subpoena powers. Yes, it does. We just did this when House Democrats tried to subpoena Trump’s financial records. The Supreme Court was very clear that the House has broad legislative subpoena power when what they are seeking is related to potential legislation, but that it is subject to a balancing test between the two branches. But even the dissenters in that case said that Congress could have sought those records pursuant to their impeachment subpoena power. So, yes, the tool — a congressional subpoena — is the same. But the impeachment inquiry broadens their reach here. So they’ve opened the inquiry, they can get his financial records. Now it matters what they find.Barro: I agree with Sarah that the risk to Biden here depends on the underlying facts.Isgur: And I’m not sure why Democrats are so confident there won’t be anything there. The president has gotten so many of the facts wrong around Hunter Biden’s business dealings, I have no idea what his financial records will show. I am no closer to knowing whether Joe Biden was involved or not. But I’m not betting against it, either.Barro: I think the Hunter saga is extremely sad, and as I’ve written, it looks to me like the president is one of Hunter’s victims rather than a co-conspirator. I also think while there are aspects of this that are not relatable (it’s not relatable to have your son trading on your famous name to do a lot of shady business), there are other aspects that are very relatable — it is relatable to have a no-good family member with substance abuse and psychological issues who causes you a lot of trouble.Obviously, if they find some big financial scheme to transfer money to Joe Biden, the politics of this will be very different. But I don’t think they’re going to find it.Bruni: But let’s look beyond Hunter, beyond any shutdown, beyond impeachment. Sarah, Josh, if you were broadly to advise Joe Biden about how to win what is surely going to be a very, very, very close race, what would be your top three recommendations?Barro: The president’s No. 1 political liability is inflation, and food and fuel prices are the most salient aspect of inflation. He should be doing everything he can to bring price levels down. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have a ton of direct control over this — if presidents did, they wouldn’t get tripped up by this issue. But he should be approving more domestic energy production and transmission, and he should be bragging more about doing so.U.S. oil production is nearing record levels, but Biden is reluctant to talk about that because it makes climate activists mad. If he gets attacked from the left for making gasoline too cheap and plentiful, great.Isgur: Make it a referendum on Trump. It’s what Hillary Clinton failed to do in 2016. When it’s about Trump, voters get squeamish. When it’s about Biden, they think of all of his flaws instead.Bruni: Squeamish doesn’t begin to capture how Trump makes this voter feel. Additional recommendations?Barro: Biden generally needs to be willing to pick more fights with the left. Trump has shown how this kind of politics works — by picking a fight with pro-life activists, he’s moderating his own image and increasing his odds of winning the general election. There’s a new poll out this week that says that voters see the Democratic Party as more extreme than the Republican Party by a margin of nine points. Biden needs to address that gap by finding his own opportunities to break with the extremes of his party — energy and fossil fuels provide one big opportunity, as I discussed earlier, but he can also break with his party in other areas where its agenda has unpopular elements, like crime and immigration.Isgur: The Republican National Committee handed Biden’s team a gift when they pulled out of the bipartisan debate commission. Biden doesn’t have to debate now. And he shouldn’t. The Trump team should want a zillion debates with Biden. I have no idea why they gave him this out.Bruni: I hear you, Sarah, on how Biden might bear up for two hours under bright lights, but let’s be realistic: Debates don’t exactly flatter Trump, who comes across as one part feral, two parts deranged. But let’s address the Kamala Harris factor. Josh, you’ve recommended replacing Harris, though it won’t happen. Maybe that’s your third? But you have to tell me whom you’d replace her with.Barro: Harris isn’t just a 2024 problem but also a 2028 problem. She is materially less popular than Biden is, and because of Biden’s age, he even more than most presidents needs a vice president who Americans feel comfortable seeing take the presidency, and the polls show that’s not her. I’ve written about why he should put Gretchen Whitmer on the ticket instead. What Biden needs to hold 270 electoral votes is to keep the Upper Midwest swing states where his poll numbers are actually holding up pretty well — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The popular governor of Michigan can do a lot more for him there than Harris can.Isgur: It is a big problem that voters don’t think Biden will make it through another term, so that the V.P. question isn’t will she make a good vice president but will she make a good president. Democrats are quick to point out that V.P. attacks haven’t worked in the past. True! But nobody was really thinking about Dan Quayle sitting behind the Resolute Desk, either. But I don’t think they can replace Harris. The cost would be too high with the base. I also don’t think Harris can get better. So my advice here is to hide her. Don’t remind voters that they don’t like her. Quit setting her up for failure and word salads.Bruni: I want to end with a lightning round and maybe find some fugitive levity — God knows we need it. In honor of Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey, I wonder: How many gold bars does each of you have in your basement or closet? Mine are in my pantry, behind the cashews, and I haven’t counted them lately.Barro: I understand Bob Menendez keeps tons of cash in his house because his family had to flee a Communist revolution. This is completely understandable. The only reason I don’t keep all that gold on hand is that I do not have a similar familial history.Isgur: Mine are made of chocolate, and they are delicious. (Dark chocolate. Milk chocolate is for wusses, and white chocolate is a lie.)Bruni: Are we measuring Kevin McCarthy’s remaining time as House speaker in hours, weeks or months, and what’s your best guess for when he subsequently appears in — and how he fares on — “Dancing With the Stars”?Isgur: Why do people keep going on that show?! The money can’t possibly be that good. I’ll take the over on McCarthy, though. The Matt Gaetz caucus doesn’t have a viable replacement or McCarthy wouldn’t have won in the first place … or 15th place.Barro: I also take the over on McCarthy — most of his caucus likes him, and unlike the John Boehner era, he hasn’t had to resort to moving spending bills that lack majority support in the conference. Gaetz and his ilk are a huge headache, but he won’t be going anywhere.Bruni: Does the confirmed November debate between Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom — moderated by Sean Hannity! — represent reason to live or reason to emigrate?Barro: Ugh. I find Newsom so grating and slimy. All you really need to know about him is he had an affair with his campaign manager’s wife. He’s also been putting his interests ahead of the party’s, with this cockamamie proposal for a constitutional amendment to restrict gun rights. It will never happen, will raise the salience of gun issues in a way that hurts Democratic candidates in a general election and will help Newsom build a grass roots email fund-raising list.Isgur: Oh, I actually think this is pretty important. Newsom and DeSantis more than anyone else in their parties actually represent the policy zeitgeist of their teams right now. This is the debate we should be having in 2024. As governors, they’ve been mirror images of each other. The problem for a Burkean like me is that both of them want to use and expand state power to “win” for their team. There’s no party making the argument for limited government or fiscal restraint anymore. And there’s no concern about what happens when you empower government and the other side wins an election and uses that power the way they want to.Bruni: You’ve no choice: You must dine, one-on-one, with either Matt Gaetz or Marjorie Taylor Greene. Whom do you choose, and how do you dull the pain?Barro: Marjorie Taylor Greene, but we’d spend the whole time talking about Lauren Boebert.Isgur: Damn. That was a good answer. Can I pick George Santos? At least he’s got great stories.Bruni: Last question — we’ve been plenty gloomy. Name something or a few things that have happened over recent weeks that should give us hope about the country’s future.Barro: The Ibram Kendi bubble popped! So, that was good.More seriously, while inflation remains a major problem (and a totally valid voter complaint), the economy has continued to show resiliency on output and job growth. People still want to spend and invest, despite 7 percent mortgage rates. It points to underlying health in the economy and a reason to feel good about American business and living standards in the medium and long term.Isgur: I had a baby this month — and in fact, September is one of the most popular birth month in the United States — so for all of us who are newly unburdened, we’re enjoying that second (third?) glass of wine, deli meat, sushi, unpasteurized cheese and guilt-free Coke Zero. And the only trade-off is that a little potato screams at me for about two hours each night!But you look at these new studies showing that the overall birthrate in the United States is staying low as teen pregnancies drop and birth control becomes more available but that highly educated woman are having more kids than they did 40 years ago … clearly some people are feeling quite hopeful. Or randy. Or both!Bruni: Sarah, that’s wonderful about your little potato — and your sushi!Barro: Congratulations!Bruni: Pop not only goes the weasel but also the Ramaswamy and the Kendi — and the Barro, ever popping off! Thank you both. Happy Republican debate! If that’s not the oxymoron of the century.Frank Bruni is a professor of journalism and public policy at Duke University, the author of the book “The Beauty of Dusk” and a contributing Opinion writer. He writes a weekly email newsletter.Josh Barro writes the newsletter Very Serious and is the host of the podcast “Serious Trouble.”Sarah Isgur is a senior editor at The Dispatch and the host of the podcast “Advisory Opinions.”Source photograph by ZargonDesign, via Getty Images.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More